Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Table 1.

Differences between the method by Hoyle and Henley and that by Guyot et al.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

The mean of the exponential distribution in simulations.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Summary of simulation variables.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 1.

Simulation results for the five methods: 100 patients per trial.

The values of .6, 1 and 2 represent the shape values of the Weibull distribution and .76, .42 and .26 represent the censoring rates.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 4.

Simulation results of mean survival time, bias, and MSE at 0.26, 0.42 and 0.76 censoring rate with sample size = 100 from three shapes of hazard function (weibull distribution).

More »

Table 4 Expand

Fig 2.

Simulation results for the five methods: 500 patients per trial.

The values of .6, 1 and 2 represent the shape values of the Weibull distribution and .76, .42 and .26 represent the censoring rates.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Table 5.

Simulation results of mean survival time, bias, and MSE at 0.26, 0.42 and 0.76 censoring rate with sample size = 500 from three shapes of hazard function (weibull distribution).

More »

Table 5 Expand

Fig 3.

Simulation results for the five methods: 100 patients per trial.

The values of 2 and 1 represent the sigma values of the lognormal distribution and .76, .42 and .26 represent the censoring rates.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 6.

Simulation results of mean survival time, bias, and MSE at 0.26, 0.42 and 0.76 censoring rate with sample size = 100 from two shapes of hazard function (lognormal distribution).

More »

Table 6 Expand

Fig 4.

Simulation results for the five methods: 500 patients per trial.

The values of 2 and 1 represent the sigma values of the lognormal distribution and .76, .42 and .26 represent the censoring rates.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Table 7.

Simulation results of mean survival time, bias, and MSE at 0.26, 0.42 and 0.76 censoring rate with sample size = 500 from two shapes of hazard function (lognormal distribution).

More »

Table 7 Expand

Fig 5.

Simulation results for the five methods: 1000 patients per trial.

The simulation were run with γ set to 0.6 and λ set to 6.65 and censoring rate set to 0.76 for Weibull distribution.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

Simulation results for the five methods: 1000 patients per trial.

The simulation were run with σ set to 2 and μ set to 0.30 and censoring rate set to 0.76 for lognormal distribution.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

The results of uncertainty regarding the estimate of mean survival time.

The uncertainty was captured in the following situations: Weibull distribution: A. γ = 0.6, censoring rate = 0.76; B. γ = 1, censoring rate = 0.76; C. γ = 1, censoring rate = 0.26, and lognormal distribution: D. σ = 2, censoring rate = 0.26.

More »

Fig 7 Expand